3 ms·
Here is another example. They spent like a good 5 minutes talking about how they hired all these smart kids to work on cryptography, specifically code breaking.
by vinhboy 13y ago
Here is another example. They spent like a good 5 minutes talking about how they hired all these smart kids to work on cryptography, specifically code breaking. Maybe 60 minutes could have simply asked them, "We have reports that you are working to undermine secure internet communication, is that what your code breaking work is for? And why are you doing that?
- res0nat0r 13y ago>We have reports that you are working to undermine secure internet communication That isn't a loaded question whatsoever. This response is justifying my statement above. The piece needed to have many 'When did you stop beating your wife?' type questions before the majority of the audience here would be happy with the reporting.
- vinhboy 13y agoHow is that a loaded question? It's a statement of fact. 1) They had people working on intercepting Google's private internet, 2) They actively wanted to weaken SSL. For your example: Yes, if the interviewee was charged with beating his wife, that would be a very fair question. Not asking that would just be dishonest.
- growupkids 13y agoHow is saying they're working on code breaking not admitting they are working on breaking internet cryptography? Isn't that the same thing? What other widely used codes could they be working on besides the algorithms used in TLS and SSL. It's seems to me they answered your question on TV. And really, don't we already know they do it, and don't we already know why they do it: because they can, because congress lets them do it, because the president ordered them to do it. If the politicians were truly opposed to this, wouldn't they have shut it down by now? Pay no attention to the politicians behind the curtain: Blame the out of control NSA!
- philwelch 13y agoNo politician ever shut down J. Edgar Hoover, and not for lack of wanting or trying. Hell, they have a hard enough time with relatively innocent bureaucracies. Do you really think No Such Agency lacks defenses from political interference?
- aestra 13y ago>Yes, if the interviewee was charged with beating his wife No. Convicted, yes. Charged, no. Here in the United States we have the presumption of innocence.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- elpool2 13y ago"We have reports that you beat your wife" is not an unfair question to ask someone charged with beating his wife. Just because our legal system presumes innocence doesn't mean you can't question someone until they've been convicted of a crime.
- aestra 13y ago"We have reports that you beat your wife" is fair and to question someone on that is fair and is much much different from "when did you stop beating your wife?" which the GP said was a fair question. I never said or even implied you can't question someone until they have been convicted of a crime, I just said questioning them like they are already guilty isn't fair and I think is shitty journalism.
- ACow_Adonis 13y agoExcept its not a loaded question when you ask a wife-beater whether they've stopped beating their wife. Just as its not a loaded question to ask the NSA, who is using cryptographers to try to break encryption on the internet, whether their cryptographers are trying to break encryption on the internet...
- philwelch 13y ago"Have you stopped beating your wife?" is a loaded question. "Do you beat your wife?" is not.
- darkarmani 13y agoSo after they say "yes" how would you go about asking them if they stopped in a non-loaded manner?
- TheCondor 13y agoIronically, they are chartered to secure our signals as well, what exactly are they doing to that end?